Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Are we supposed to take hints from how the unsullied are being represented in the show so far, or ignore it for the sake of drama / time frame / whatever?

I was under the impression that the unsullied were built up both in the show and in the books as a very formidable fighting force. The conditioning alone seems to go far beyond anything else in the world, while being trained from such a young age seems like something reserved only for the nobility of Westeros. I always imagined them to be some kind of jedi / samurai mix.

Being open minded I can see this compensating for the fact that they are a very lightly armored phalanx formation, that might ultimately have to face heavy medieval cavalry in potentially foreign and unfavorable terrain. The discipline would allow them to withstand a charge, skill / dexterity to unhorse the knights... something, i can definitely see it happening.

However, after watching the show, it got me thinking, and now i'm concerned.

I take the watered down TV plotline as a hint to what will happen in the books. As in, lady Stoneheart might not be as important to the main plot line, as she is to giving weight to the red god, or some satisfaction to the reader when killing Freys. But you can definitely see which subplots are important based even on the all-in-one merged characters.

With all that being said... the Unsullied seem way too puny to be considered as a real fighting force.

They are very lightly armored / partially uncovered. Joffreys entourage can cut through hundreds of rioters with ease, mostly because of steel - advanced weapons and armor.

The finest swordsman from Bravoos may have been killed by Trant, who the Hound considers a laughing stock, not a real fighter. Again we're shown that advanced medieval armor can give an inferior fighter advantage over a superior one.

We are specifically told that slaves suck at fighting, especially compared to the Unsullied who have been raised to fight. The masters seem old, obese, frail, even gentle when we consider Hizdar. But now we see Unsullied dropping like flies to UNARMORED slaves / and or / masters (they wear robes or are half naked).

The only other type of fighting unit are the sell swords. They seem to be somewhat less disciplined than the standing armies of Westeros,

Unsullied seem to posses very little skill at actual hand to hand, unarmed combat. Samurai knew ju-jutsu so they could fight heavily armored opponents. When a sword doesn't cut through armor, a throw is more efficient.

They also seem to be very poor tacticians - a spear is no weapon for street patrol and house sweeps. I seem to recall that they had some kind of a short sword in the books? The way they were scattered around the coliseum didn't make much sense either.

The love / whore cuddling angle. Could their freedom have made them soft? These are supposed to be vicious baby killers, but compared to the Mountain, they don't really match up.

This uprising is basically butlers, socialites, carpenters and linguists vs. an army of jedi, SAS, SEAL, 300 types, but the latter are losing. If the heavily armored lannisters, kings guard, or possibly even the city watch were in there place, the harpies would have been slaughtered with little to no casualties on the defenders side. One heavily armored Mountain seems like he could deal more damage than Drogon. The Hound's armor cannot be pierced by Arya's castle forged fine sword.

I wonder if the producers ever saw riot police at a soccer match, given that they are filming in Croatia and all. It looks a lot different, but it actually looks like the legions or the phalanx may have looked like thousands of years ago, more like what one would expect the unsullied to be.

If the unsullied can't figure out that it's better to block off the entrance to the arena with their shields and spears, rather then let them pour in, how will they fare in the diverse landscape of Westeros, where every faction seems to be used to their terrain (northmen in the north, we've seen in this episode, Beylish mentions how the lords of the Vail used the mountainous terrain, etc).

Could it be that Essos is simply unaware that Westeros is hundreds of years ahead in war technology given that there has been no direct engagement between the two?

I don't think the Dothraki would fare well against heavy cavalry, plate armor, pikemen, wildfire etc. either. Are we in for a surprise when Dany's "army" faces an actual real army, with or without the dragons?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Fair enough. One would think that, if a single line is all one has to establish a plot point, that line might make it into the "Previously On" segment.

ShowShireen was a very charming character who had a wonderful relationship with Davos. I do not complain about her being an expanded presence, except that I don't feel that expansion was worth the time it took away from more important characters. When it comes to the specific storyline of her burning; your mileage may very, but for reasons I've already given, I thought it was a mess.

Further further thoughts:

- For all my complaints about the weaknesses of Shireen's burning as storytelling, two simple changes would have gone a long way toward making it not only competent, but engaging:

1. Tie it into the story of Azor Ahai. ShowShireen is always reading histories and legends; having her read about Azor Ahai when Stannis comes into the tent would have been heavy-handed, but it would have brought up a parallel between that legend and what Stannis supposedly is.

2. Instead of a fake-out, have Shireen actually be a willing sacrifice. She loves her father and knows all these legends; I would find her naive devotion and faith that she was helping her father fulfill his destiny far more convincing than the forced reversal of Selyse, and it would be interesting to see how Stannis reacts to such devotion, especially if he harbours doubts about the need to do this at all.

:lol: I appreciate you including your 'further further' thoughts, as I do agree with them to a degree.

I don't remember if the Nissa Nissa subject has been brought up in previous seasons (I thought Salador Saan mentioned Azor Ahai to Davos), but it would have given the entire storyline more relevance if it had been included. And your thoughts on Shireen being a willing sacrifice are spot-on.

My thoughts when watching were:

1. Stannis told Mel to eff off when Jon was at Hardhome. However long it took for Jon et al to reach Castle Black is how long Stannis' gang had been freezing in the northern winter. They are already running low on supplies, men are deserting, and they cannot linger in the midst of winter.

I was born in Arctic Canada, and had several frostbite scars to prove it when I was younger. The thing Arctic folk know is that you do not travel in winter. You hole up somewhere with your provisions and wait it out, even if it means having to eat your huskies to keep you alive 'til spring.

Two reasons you can't travel: your body is using up too much energy so you have to eat more of your food stash; sweating when it is freezing outside ends up lowering your body heat which leads to hypothermia - which leads to death.

The men with Stannis are southern (as is Stannis). It's one thing to hold off a siege in a southern climate within a castle (yes, there's no food, but there is plenty of water) and another to stay alive in the midst of a winter storm for weeks on end using up all your supplies just to stay warm.

In no way am I excusing Stannis (and my finger is pointed straight at Mel), but to those who say there was no urgency in Stannis' predicament, I think you have to look more closely at the timeline, and the shots of the men in his camp.

True story: some Europeans went up to the town I was born in a few years back. The one that stood out for me (I watched a documentary on this just last year) was a southern European who declared he didn't need the toque and scarf offered to him by the more experienced crew. He was there for less than a week before he had to leave due to what was considered by the crew to be a medical emergency: debilitating (severe) frostbite. You cannot fight extremely cold weather. Something to think about.

eta: hell, I've been rooting for the white walkers since season one and book one. I'm happy to see I'm not alone anymore.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

LOL, I think if anything the takeaway from Benioff's reveal is that Stannis fans who claimed that BOOK STANNIS WOULD NEVAH "didn't understand the books." Oh, well.

Did you even see/hear the exact quote? It in no way implies that Stannis was directly responsible. that would be like Jeoffrey swinging the sword instead of Illyn and afterwards D&D covering their asses with an ambiguous quote "when George told us about this".

The bottom line is no one is going to know the truth for another three or four years until the book comes out.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guys, I tried to creat a new thread yesterday, but the mods did not validate it. I've read the advices on how to create new topic, so I don't know what I'm doing it wrong. I'll post it here anyway.

[TV Spoilers] Is Stannis the Walter White-like villain that GRRM told us about?

We are all shocked about the Stannisgate Scandal from last Sunday's Game of Thrones. Many fans saw him as a hero, the rightful king and the most desearving candidate to the throne. A fraction of those fans refuses to believe that this heinous act could be in the books, with full approval of Stannis, they feel that burning Shireen was out of character.

(Feel free to skip the following three paragraphs, where I share my opinion about the events of last episode and what it means for Stannis)

Personally, I don't think what happened is out of character at all, it makes perfect sense. Of course, Stannis doesn't have POV chapters, therefore we can't know for sure how he feels about being identified as Azor Ahai reborn. But even if he has doubts about it and is just pragmatically using Melisandre to get the throne, the mythos of Azor Ahai probably is still an important framework for Stannis world view.

When Stannis was debating on the sacrifice of Edric Storm/Gendry, it was already established that in his opinion, taking one innocent life in order to sacrifice the lives of millions was morally sound. I don't know if I agree with that conclusion, but I think it's admirable that he won't make a distinction between a stranger and a loved one if he has to weigh one life against the whole humanity. And that's exactly what Azor Ahai had to do: he killed the person he loved the most in the whole world, his wife, Nissa Nissa, in order to defeat the Great Other.

So, Stannis did an awful thing, but with a noble intent in mind. I think that's a great development for his character, he has became one of the most complex characters of the show and maybe the only reason why we don't see him as a hero anymore is because we all think he is misguided in his belief that he is indeed destined to save the world. Stannis is a failed hero, one that was led to make a villanous act due to wrong beliefs.

One could even say that Stannis is... breaking bad...

You all know Breaking Bad, one of the best TV series of all time, which tells the story of a brilliant, but grossly unappreciated chemist, who starts to make drugs. At first he has good intentions, but gradually he is consumed by evil and by the end of the series he becomes a memorable villain. Showrunner Vince Gilligan described the show as "From Mr. Chips to Scarface."

You see, Breaking Bad is all about the process, the change, the nice guy that eventually becomes a monster. We shouldn't expect GRRM to fulfill his promise of creating a monster worse than Walter White with a whole new character. It would take five more books to make him become that monster. No, ASoI&F's Walter White had to be a character that we already know. One who started his journey as a hero, but one day, he made a very bad decision that he couldn't take back.

If my reasoning is true and GRRM intends to turn Stannis in a Walter White-like villain, I'd expect him to survive the battle of Winterfell and stick around for quite some time. Sorry, Brienne, no revenge for you for the time being.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guys, I tried to creat a new thread yesterday, but the mods did not validate it. I've read the advices on how to create new topic, so I don't know what I'm doing it wrong. I'll post it here anyway.

[TV Spoilers] Is Stannis the Walter White-like villain that GRRM told us about?

We are all shocked about the Stannisgate Scandal from last Sunday's Game of Thrones. Many fans saw him as a hero, the rightful king and the most desearving candidate to the throne. A fraction of those fans refuses to believe that this heinous act could be in the books, with full approval of Stannis, they feel that burning Shireen was out of character.

(Feel free to skip the following three paragraphs, where I share my opinion about the events of last episode and what it means for Stannis)

Personally, I don't think what happened is out of character at all, it makes perfect sense. Of course, Stannis doesn't have POV chapters, therefore we can't know for sure how he feels about being identified as Azor Ahai reborn. But even if he has doubts about it and is just pragmatically using Melisandre to get the throne, the mythos of Azor Ahai probably is still an important framework for Stannis world view.

When Stannis was debating on the sacrifice of Edric Storm/Gendry, it was already established that in his opinion, taking one innocent life in order to sacrifice the lives of millions was morally sound. I don't know if I agree with that conclusion, but I think it's admirable that he won't make a distinction between a stranger and a loved one if he has to weigh one life against the whole humanity. And that's exactly what Azor Ahai had to do: he killed the person he loved the most in the whole world, his wife, Nissa Nissa, in order to defeat the Great Other.

So, Stannis did an awful thing, but with a noble intent in mind. I think that's a great development for his character, he has became one of the most complex characters of the show and maybe the only reason why we don't see him as a hero anymore is because we all think he is misguided in his belief that he is indeed destined to save the world. Stannis is a failed hero, one that was led to make a villanous act due to wrong beliefs.

One could even say that Stannis is... breaking bad...

You all know Breaking Bad, one of the best TV series of all time, which tells the story of a brilliant, but grossly unappreciated chemist, who starts to make drugs. At first he has good intentions, but gradually he is consumed by evil and by the end of the series he becomes a memorable villain. Showrunner Vince Gilligan described the show as "From Mr. Chips to Scarface."

You see, Breaking Bad is all about the process, the change, the nice guy that eventually becomes a monster. We shouldn't expect GRRM to fulfill his promise of creating a monster worse than Walter White with a whole new character. It would take five more books to make him become that monster. No, ASoI&F's Walter White had to be a character that we already know. One who started his journey as a hero, but one day, he made a very bad decision that he couldn't take back.

If my reasoning is true and GRRM intends to turn Stannis in a Walter White-like villain, I'd expect him to survive the battle of Winterfell and stick around for quite some time. Sorry, Brienne, no revenge for you for the time being.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guys, I tried to creat a new thread yesterday, but the mods did not validate it. I've read the advices on how to create new topic, so I don't know what I'm doing it wrong. I'll post it here anyway.

[TV Spoilers] Is Stannis the Walter White-like villain that GRRM told us about?

We are all shocked about the Stannisgate Scandal from last Sunday's Game of Thrones. Many fans saw him as a hero, the rightful king and the most desearving candidate to the throne. A fraction of those fans refuses to believe that this heinous act could be in the books, with full approval of Stannis, they feel that burning Shireen was out of character.

(Feel free to skip the following three paragraphs, where I share my opinion about the events of last episode and what it means for Stannis)

Personally, I don't think what happened is out of character at all, it makes perfect sense. Of course, Stannis doesn't have POV chapters, therefore we can't know for sure how he feels about being identified as Azor Ahai reborn. But even if he has doubts about it and is just pragmatically using Melisandre to get the throne, the mythos of Azor Ahai probably is still an important framework for Stannis world view.

When Stannis was debating on the sacrifice of Edric Storm/Gendry, it was already established that in his opinion, taking one innocent life in order to sacrifice the lives of millions was morally sound. I don't know if I agree with that conclusion, but I think it's admirable that he won't make a distinction between a stranger and a loved one if he has to weigh one life against the whole humanity. And that's exactly what Azor Ahai had to do: he killed the person he loved the most in the whole world, his wife, Nissa Nissa, in order to defeat the Great Other.

So, Stannis did an awful thing, but with a noble intent in mind. I think that's a great development for his character, he has became one of the most complex characters of the show and maybe the only reason why we don't see him as a hero anymore is because we all think he is misguided in his belief that he is indeed destined to save the world. Stannis is a failed hero, one that was led to make a villanous act due to wrong beliefs.

One could even say that Stannis is... breaking bad...

You all know Breaking Bad, one of the best TV series of all time, which tells the story of a brilliant, but grossly unappreciated chemist, who starts to make drugs. At first he has good intentions, but gradually he is consumed by evil and by the end of the series he becomes a memorable villain. Showrunner Vince Gilligan described the show as "From Mr. Chips to Scarface."

You see, Breaking Bad is all about the process, the change, the nice guy that eventually becomes a monster. We shouldn't expect GRRM to fulfill his promise of creating a monster worse than Walter White with a whole new character. It would take five more books to make him become that monster. No, ASoI&F's Walter White had to be a character that we already know. One who started his journey as a hero, but one day, he made a very bad decision that he couldn't take back.

If my reasoning is true and GRRM intends to turn Stannis in a Walter White-like villain, I'd expect him to survive the battle of Winterfell and stick around for quite some time. Sorry, Brienne, no revenge for you for the time being.

But Stannis was never ever presented as a 'good guy'.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Not as a typical good guy (few characters in ASoI&F are your typical good guy, anyway), he has been doing horrible things since he was introduced. But at least someone relatable that we could root for. Since you have almost 4000 posts in these forums, you know that Stannis has a lot of fans.

He is one of the few major characters that understands that there is a major threat looming upon the world and he does have good intentions, althoug the means he uses to achieve his goals are really objectable. Now he has done something inexcusable and could be dragged in a downward spiral of evil, akin to Walter White.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

From a critical perspective of the show, sure, this was a difficult pill to swallow, but it had to happen. The show made every effort to make sure that we all loved Shireen. But what did the show really lose? Shireen didn't have much screen time and she was a minor character. She was a device that the show used to dictate to the audience how it wanted us to feel about Stannis. She was basically a supporting actress for Stannis (great performance by Kerry Ingram btw, really made use feel the horror of that scene.) One of the big problems that the show had was that people kept saying how boring Stannis was. That he was a one dimensional character who was not interesting. I think that you could make that argument fairly for Show Stannis. No fault of Stephen Dillane, I think he is a great actor, but the victim of poor writing development and not enough screen time. Well, guess who is not boring anymore? Guess who is not one dimensional anymore? I'm pretty interested in what Stannis does now. I'll be pretty glued to the screen now during his scenes. Hey! What a change! If D&D are smart enough to let Stephen Dillane portray a man who seems like he is going to continue a descent into complete madness then I'm sure it will make for hours and hours of really great acting and really great television. Show Stannis is as interesting now as Book Stannis now, if not more interesting. Well done! Stannis burning people alive before was "horrible" but the show never gave us much reason to care about Renly or his relationship with Renly or anyone else he burned. This is the first time that we've seen Stannis make a true "sacrifice." He loved Shireen and a big part of him died with her. There was internal conflict on the screen, man vs himself, drama, great acting, and - character depth! Something that has not always shown up for his character and something that his happening less and less on the show with some of the more cartoonish characters. Personally, I think this is one of the better moves by the show, and all the actors really shined in it. Weren't you screaming at the screen or looking away or peaking in horror? It evoked raw emotion WHILE building tons of character depth. I think that is missing from a lot of the scenes that are purely for lowbrow shock value.

-sidenote-

For instance, compare the shocking Shireen scene to the shocking Sansa rape scene. Poor taste all around. It wasn't done particularity well and it didn't add or subtract anything from the characters development. We've seen Sansa be tortured. Again and again and again with NO character development and NO character arc. I thought Sansa turned a corner last season when she lied for little finger and came down the stairs dressed as a "new Sansa" but instead her character regressed and now seems as if she is always just in a steady decline, Damsel in distress that needs saving. D&D abandoned her arc for the sake of shock. Pornographers and shock jocks do that. REAL writers and directors DO NOT. Bad form and poor writing to the point where the show nearly "jumped the shark." It showed a lot of immaturity on the part of D&D and those two trying to pass it off as something that was done for any other reason except for pure shock value insults the intelligence of its fans.

-Back to Stannis-

In this show, people who get caught up in the game of thrones suffer or die because of their character flaws. Not all characters die, some just go on suffering their flaws and many end up tortured mentally or physcially for it (Theon for his uncertain identity; Sansa ended up in her now redundant decline for her naivete; Ned for his honor; Jon Snow for his willingness to do "the right thing"; Oberyn and his need to hear the Mountain confess.) The biggest flaw of Stannis is his own determination and will to win. I believe that Stannis could go far and maybe even to the end of Game of Thrones and he will be tortured mentally for it. He will score his victories but they will cost him more and more and each will be more pyrrhic until he sacrifices so much that it's "no longer worth it." By the time he reaches the end, he will have lost everything once dear to him. I'd be disappointed if Stannis lost the battle to the Boltons or if he was killed by a reappearing Brienne or Littlefinger. It would not be a very poetic end to a rather epic character. Another reason to still be on Team Stannis is simply so the show doesn't just kill off what is becoming a really interesting character and great performance by Stephen Dillane in favor of more lowbrow shocks with the Bolton characters.

I'm still on Team Stannis here. The show went out of it's way to show that Stannis and his men would have died if they had just sat there, freezing and starving. Stannis did everything in his power to save his men. Was it "right?" No. Of course not, but it was interesting. When the Boltons kill someone, they do it for pleasure and for fun. That is different, Stannis did this because he believed he had to. It was a sacrifice, not just in the physical nature of it but in the emotional sense of it too. "Sacrifice" meaning that you give up something and he gave up what was most dear to him because he believes that he can stop the disaster that is about to befall this world (didn't you see epsiode 8 and what's coming for everyone!) Yes, he is on a steady descent into complete madness and becoming less of a man than a monster but I find it all quite interesting on the screen! Give Stephen Dillane something to do other than sit around and mope and he delivers! Was there anyone who was not at least a little excited when Stannis pulled out his sword at the head of his army as if he was ready to charge on a battlefield in the preview for Episode 10? Does anyone NOT want to watch what Stannis will do to the Boltons if he gets through those gates next week? Is anyone else excited that there is a bigger, more terrible and more determined monster knocking at the door of the Boltons now? Sure, Stannis sacrificed his daughter to what seems to be a cruel deity, but now he has to make sure that sacrifice wasn't made in vein and that makes for a really interesting battle between the Boltons and a now even more determined Stannis.

Thoughts and predictions for next week: Some how, it seems from the trailer that the Baratheon army and the sell swords are not only ready to siege but to charge/engage? Am I wrong? Do they somehow manage to get through the gates? Is Ramsay dumb/proud enough to come out from the walls and meet Stannis on the open field in an attempt to impress his father? Could Sansa get her revenge on the Boltons by somehow opening the gates of Winterfell (if not demolishing them with the help of Brienne/Pod/Stark Loyalists) with Theon and escaping in the midst of battle? After all, they both know Winterfell better than anyone and if she is going to take a chance and risk death then let it happen while there is still some of her left?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Not as a typical good guy (few characters in ASoI&F are your typical good guy, anyway), he has been doing horrible things since he was introduced. But at least someone relatable that we could root for. Since you have almost 4000 posts in these forums, you know that Stannis has a lot of fans.

He is one of the few major characters that understands that there is a major threat looming upon the world and he does have good intentions, althoug the means he uses to achieve his goals are really objectable. Now he has done something inexcusable and could be dragged in a downward spiral of evil, akin to Walter White.

I am a hardcore Stannis fan.

One of the problems I have with events on the show is that we know it didn't happen like that in the books for several reasons, including the timeline of events. I also have a problem with Stannis being the one who decided to sacrifice his daughter and heir at the drop of a hat. Part of the problem here is the show's sloppiness and inconsistency within their own story. If Davos says there are hundreds of dead horses, they cannot be starving. So it seems extremely idiotic to burn your sole heir just because of some snow - Satannis was not in straits dire enough to justify this. I'm on the camp that thinks if Shireen burns it will be without Stannis knowledge. And if he does know and approves, it will be a world end scenario, not because they missed their morning tea and couldn't be bothered to wait for the horse meat to be roasted.

As to your first post, I don't think Martin really meant to change a character just to make him/her more 'monstrous' than Walter White, my take on it was that he was just joking.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You think that scene, with the fires all being lit into huge bonfires simultaneously is completely plausible?

And I'm still quite unclear on why since they specifically say their horses are mostly killed...how they are starving? It's below freezing, they have tons of horse meat. They actually have plenty of time to send Davos back for horses and supplies without burning anybody.

Throw some kerosene on some medieval fabric and set a match to it. See what happens. I'm guessing they didn't have the technology to make things fire retardant yet.